daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 11th, 2008, 12:59 AM   #6681
friendsofthecity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,929
Likes (Received): 690

What great use would be observation deck for a residemtial building? Have your apartment among the top floors and you will get your best view of the city.
friendsofthecity no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 11th, 2008, 01:20 AM   #6682
helghast
Registered User
 
helghast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,374
Likes (Received): 147

Quote:
Originally Posted by stewartrama View Post
im sry but i think that NYC claims the title of "birthplace of modern architecture". First 1000 footers, tallest buildings, etc.
in your dreams, Chicago is the Birthplace skyscraper!!! and chicago will always have taller buildings then ny
__________________
"If you put the empire state building on top of the Sears Tower then it's reasonable to say you'll be in the neighbourhood," Mr Baker says.
helghast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 01:23 AM   #6683
beeneverywheretwice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 12
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by buildmilehightower View Post
Is there any good reason for not putting in observation deck for chicago spire?

Apart from to make this tower the tallest all residential building.
I've never heard of an observation deck in an all residential building. But, I've never heard of a lot of things.
beeneverywheretwice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 01:24 AM   #6684
helghast
Registered User
 
helghast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,374
Likes (Received): 147

Quote:
Originally Posted by buildmilehightower View Post
NYC: most number of supertalls in the world (according to skyscraperpage)

Chicago: hometown of the skyscraper.

But NYC no doubt has most famous and historically brilliant skyscrapers.
Dubai will beat Ny for more super talls and currently has the most and BTW dont belvie everything u read from SS. back to the chicago spire!!! whats the date for it to rise ????
__________________
"If you put the empire state building on top of the Sears Tower then it's reasonable to say you'll be in the neighbourhood," Mr Baker says.
helghast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 01:43 AM   #6685
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 62,731
Likes (Received): 10109

Q1 tower in Gold coast, Australia is currently worlds tallest apartment tower. It has 78floors and top 2 floors are dedicated to public observation. The reason is probably because its such an iconic design and GC hasnt got an observation deck. The observation levels have there own lobby and entrance while the 500 units have separate lobby entrance.
Q1 at 322m was completed in 2005. Eureka in melbourne which has 13 more floors and 60m higher roof was never recognised as worlds tallest completed 2006 . because its 297m.
Q1


You have to remember, AMERICAN architects would have designed Pentominium and they would realise that they could beat Chicago Spires height due to its height limit of 610m.

SPIRES LIGHTING?
someone asked me about Burj Dubais lighting and i told them theres NO WAY the apartments will be externally lit.(residence would complain) only offices can have external lighting. Also the archtietctual feature on top can be lit up.
Chicagos Spire WONT be lit up at all at night due to being a residential tower. it will be in darkness compared to office towers. maybe the top section will be lit or this beam everyone keeps saying.

Eureka at night
image hosted on flickr


this is why Q1 has top 50m and spire lit up.and rest of tower is just internal lights.
photo>
image hosted on flickr
__________________
Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2020.. https://www.buildsydney.com/forum

Last edited by CULWULLA; July 11th, 2008 at 02:04 AM.
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 05:11 AM   #6686
cabrabuitre
Registered User
 
cabrabuitre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danillo View Post
I think this is a really interesting question. A building like this, designed by such a famous architect, is (if you'll allow my extended metaphor) sort of like reading the Bible or the Koran. Almost nobody picks up the Bible without preconceived ideas about it's contents. So when one does read it, there's so many messages in there that while they may learn some new things, most people will find the bits that fit reinforce the ideas they came into it with.

In the same way, you can't possibly set aside that this building is a Calatrava, the man's reputation precedes him so much and his status was so central to how this project has been marketed from the start. If this was designed by John Doe it almost certainly wouldn't be as well received as it is, but with the design as it is and the preceding reputation, people can pick out things they like/dislike and love/hate the design based on that. To be fair, I'm not sure any of this is bad (given the chance, I'd rather own a Picasso than a painting of equal technical ability by a lesser know painter), it just is.

I was actually surprised though when Chicagophotoshop posted the earlier version, as that one had always been my favorite. But now that I'm used to the current design, I think I like it better. Thought I do think that Helmut may be right in that some combination of the two could be even better still. At any rate, I think it lives up to the hype associated with it's designer, and can't wait until it's built.
This is an interesting discussion, especially in light of the 29 houses in suburban Chicagoland that someone now thinks may be Frank Lloyd Wright buildings. ... Two weeks ago, they had certain artistic and architectural value, but now, (and especially if they ARE determinted to be FLW works), they may suddenly attain additional value and become artwork, not just personal dwelling spaces.

... Now, something like the Spire is a statement in and of itself because it will be the tallest building in Chicago. Like was said about the Trump, it won't matter who designed it, because the statement is being made, by the city, so much more than the architect. If you ask random folks on a Chicago street corner who designed the Sears, Hancock, or Aon, they likely won't know. ... in this community, they probably would, but...

I hope it gets built. I love how the Trump has already enhanced the Chicago skyline, and it's not even finished. How much more will a building that stretches above and gracefully reaches for the clouds?

So, like I said, it doesn't matter to me that Santiago Caltrava designed it, in terms of the style of the current version. I like the rounded top and the circular nature of the most recent version because it contrasts to the squared nature of so much of current modern Chicago. (i say modern because many historical towers are not in this same mold)

Think again, about the Sears, Hancock, and Aon. They're rigid and squared. Think about the lay out of Chicago's streets. The vast majority are set firmly in the grid.

I like how the Trump begins to bridge the gap from squared to curved... and I think the Spire is the piece to top off the skyline, at least for the forseeable future.
cabrabuitre no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 07:52 AM   #6687
BVictor1
Chicago's #1 Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,185
Likes (Received): 880

Quote:
Originally Posted by buildmilehightower View Post
Is there any good reason for not putting in observation deck for chicago spire?

Apart from to make this tower the tallest all residential building.
we do not discuss observation decks in the Chicago Spire thread. EVER!!!

It's a residential building only, and the developer didn't want the public to have access.
BVictor1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 08:00 AM   #6688
phillybud
Registered User
 
phillybud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Posts: 815
Likes (Received): 35

Chicago - birthplace of skyscrapers

Quote:
Originally Posted by helghast View Post
Dubai will beat Ny for more super talls and currently has the most and BTW dont belvie everything u read from SS.
A temporary distinction I assure you. Metro Dubai has 2.2 million people (of which 65% are South Asian - Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi - guest workers*) in it's metro area ... NYC has 8.5 million within the city limits and 20 million in it's metro area - I believe in the next 5 to 15 years NYC will build more supertalls than Dubai.

Having said that I believe Chicago is indeed the birthplace of the skyscraper; it is interesting to read about Burnham & Root, Sullivan, the Monadnock, and the Reliance.

*verify on wikipedia
__________________
"Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein
phillybud no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 09:24 AM   #6689
buildmilehightower
NANI Luis Almeida Cunha
 
buildmilehightower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3,421
Likes (Received): 240

Quote:
Originally Posted by helghast View Post
Dubai will beat Ny for more super talls and currently has the most and BTW dont belvie everything u read from SS. back to the chicago spire!!! whats the date for it to rise ????
My bad, I change more highrises in the city NYC beats Dubai not supertall.

Does someone have like a diary of Chicago spire foundation construction indicating what has been done and what has left to do?

Last edited by buildmilehightower; July 11th, 2008 at 09:29 AM.
buildmilehightower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 04:32 PM   #6690
luci203
Registered User
 
luci203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,129
Likes (Received): 1202

Quote:
Originally Posted by helghast View Post
Dubai will beat Ny for more super talls and currently has the most and BTW dont belvie everything u read from SS. back to the chicago spire!!! whats the date for it to rise ????
Actually Dubai now have only 2 "true" supertalls (Emirates Office, Rose Tower), and another 2 with help of spires to go over 300m (Emirates Hotel, Burj al Arab).

Unfinished constructions don't impress me. Is like the highway that they are buliding near my city, Look impresive but I can't go with my car on it yet.

luci203 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 06:10 PM   #6691
friendsofthecity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,929
Likes (Received): 690

Tall buildings like ChicagoSpire would have lighting at the topmost end for aircrafts not to crash into them. I think it`s necessary CS has one.
friendsofthecity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 10:52 PM   #6692
beeneverywheretwice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 12
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by friendsofthecity View Post
Tall buildings like ChicagoSpire would have lighting at the topmost end for aircrafts not to crash into them. I think it`s necessary CS has one.
Since 9/11, downtown Chicago is a permanent no-fly zone. Along with NYC and DC. They're the only three, as far as I know. FYI.
beeneverywheretwice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 11th, 2008, 10:59 PM   #6693
Twipsy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 76
Likes (Received): 4

If itīs a no fly zone, they could skip the 2000ft height limit
Twipsy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 12:10 AM   #6694
FTL Beach Bum
Registered User
 
FTL Beach Bum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 718
Likes (Received): 656

Quote:
Originally Posted by beeneverywheretwice View Post
Since 9/11, downtown Chicago is a permanent no-fly zone. Along with NYC and DC. They're the only three, as far as I know. FYI.
Absolutely not true for Chicago and NYC at this time. There are no restrictions whatsoever at either, other than the normal airspace classifications, flight rules, etc. DC does have an ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) out to a 30-nautical mile radius from Reagan-National Airport (specifically the VOR/DME navaid on-site), and a Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) approximately 13 to 15 nautical miles in radius from the same navaid.

The ADIZ is not a "no-fly zone", but rather a zone where specific procedures are in place to show security personnel who is who, and what their intent is while operating within it. See: Washington DC ADIZ Special Terms & Procedures for more information.

The FRZ within the ADIZ is much more restrictive, allowing mainly for military, law enforcement, and specific air carrier operations (with some exceptions): Operating requirements in the DC FRZ

But again, no such restrictions are in place in either New York or Chicago at this time.

(Aeronautical charts for all respective areas found here.)
FTL Beach Bum no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 12:18 AM   #6695
friendsofthecity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,929
Likes (Received): 690

Thank you for the information. I was dumbstruck when I first read the no-fly zone by beeneverywheretwice.
friendsofthecity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 12:41 AM   #6696
beeneverywheretwice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 12
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by friendsofthecity View Post
Thank you for the information. I was dumbstruck when I first read the no-fly zone by beeneverywheretwice.
Interesting info for me, as well. Friendsofthecity, you shouldn't be so easily dumbstruck. Unless of course, that was a weak attempt at condescension.
beeneverywheretwice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 04:16 AM   #6697
Retrograde
Chicago
 
Retrograde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 903
Likes (Received): 4

July 11, 2008

__________________
My Chicago Pictures
Retrograde no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 04:24 AM   #6698
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,772
Likes (Received): 209

It looks like Case has completed their work it is almost done cleaning up. Looks like the site is about ready to be turned over to the building contractor to work can really start!
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 05:33 AM   #6699
mgk920
Nonhyphenated-American
 
mgk920's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Appleton, WI USA
Posts: 2,583
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by FTL Beach Bum View Post
Absolutely not true for Chicago and NYC at this time. There are no restrictions whatsoever at either, other than the normal airspace classifications, flight rules, etc. DC does have an ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) out to a 30-nautical mile radius from Reagan-National Airport (specifically the VOR/DME navaid on-site), and a Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) approximately 13 to 15 nautical miles in radius from the same navaid.

The ADIZ is not a "no-fly zone", but rather a zone where specific procedures are in place to show security personnel who is who, and what their intent is while operating within it. See: Washington DC ADIZ Special Terms & Procedures for more information.

The FRZ within the ADIZ is much more restrictive, allowing mainly for military, law enforcement, and specific air carrier operations (with some exceptions): Operating requirements in the DC FRZ

But again, no such restrictions are in place in either New York or Chicago at this time.

(Aeronautical charts for all respective areas found here.)
Yea, ever since King Richard II ripped up Meigs Field, ALL of the City of Chicago outside of the approaches to MDW and ORD is considered to be 'Class G' airspace - the LEAST restrictive of all. You can fly around over most of the city to your heart's content and not have to say 'boo' to anybody. While Meigs was open, aircraft over much of the city (outside of the MDW and ORD IFR terminal areas) had to be in contact with the Meigs tower. There is an ORD approach that runs east-west across the city over about Irving Park Rd or Belmont St.

I do STR that in the NYC area, flight restrictions were put in place in the area over the East River after (and I forget offhand the pilot's name) that light aircraft was blown into that apartment building on Manhattan's upper east side a few years ago. I don't know if that is still the case.

Mike
mgk920 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2008, 06:38 AM   #6700
Chi-Town Runner
Registered User
 
Chi-Town Runner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 30
Likes (Received): 0

where are all the people that live in the CS going to park?
__________________
DA BEARS!
GO GO WHITE SOX!
Chi-Town Runner no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
chicago, santiago calatrava, spire, tallest, tower

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu